Jack Woodward

Aboriginal Law is a comprehensive collection of all the laws in Canada relating specifically to Aboriginal people. International law, constitutional law, statute, common law and custom are all covered, with updates six times per year and frequent revisions to whole chapters and sections in this rapidly-evolving field. Native Law was reviewed by the Alberta Law Review Society which described the text as, "a valuable aid for legal researchers who wish to establish a background in the subject area as well as for practitioners who need to know what law applies to specific issues before them."[10]

Under the editorial direction of Jack Woodward, this work continues to bring together a timely consolidation of the significant statutes, regulations, and treaties that have an impact on the area of native law. Additionally, this text contains helpful finding tools that simplify research, including a detailed master table of contents, a table of contents for each statute, and a comprehensive key word index.

Bullen & Leake & Jacob’s Precedents of Pleadings is widely regarded as the essential guide to drafting statements of case. It offers the advocate a stock of authoritative, structured precedents of statements of case complete with guiding commentary across both mainstream and specialist areas of practice. Woodward wrote part 1 which covers critical underlying principles through discussion and application within some of the more challenging areas of Aboriginal Law.

In 1984, members of the Nuu-chah-nulth First Nation and other protesters blocked MacMillan Bloedel’s access to its logging operations on Meares Island which is located in the Clayoquot Sound region of British Columbia. The dispute falls under the assertion by the Province of British Columbia who designates the targeted land as Crown Land, whereas protesters claimed that by allowing logging on Meares Island, there would be a direct interference with Aboriginal title.[12] A court injunction was sought to halt MacMillan Bloedel's operations until the claim was resolved. The Martin (Meares Island) case was adjourned by agreement of the Nuu-chah-nulth First Nation, MacMillan Bloedel, and the governments of British Columbia and Canada. The injunction on logging is still in effect and none of the parties have requested resumption of the trial.[12]

Tsilhqot’in Nation v. British Columbia is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada and the first case to successfully establish a declaration of Aboriginal title over land that a nation had historically occupied.[13] The underlying circumstances that established the reasoning behind that case begin in 1983 when the province issued licence to Carrier Lumber to begin logging in the remote areas of central British Columbia which was claimed by the Xeni Gwet'in band of the Tsilhqot'in Nation. The Xeni Gwet'in filed suit seeking a court declaration that would prohibit Carrier Lumber's commercial logging operations in this area, and establish their claim for Aboriginal title to the land. After five years at trial, both the federal and provincial governments opposed the title claim which resulted to a final appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, unanimously allowed the appeal. The Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the Tsilhqot'in people were entitled to a declaration of Aboriginal title to the 1,750 square kilometre region they had historically occupied.[13]

On 24 April 2020, the Alberta Court of Appeal released a decision in Fort McKay First Nation v Prosper Petroleum Ltd, allowing Fort McKay First Nation's (FMFN) challenge to the Alberta Energy Regulator's (AER) decision to approve Prosper Petroleum's oil sands project. In granting its approval of the project, the AER did not consider the negotiations between the Alberta government and FMFN over land management and the impacts of future oil sands development on FMFN’s Treaty 9 rights.[14] The Alberta Court of Appeal determined that the failure to consider these negotiations in the AER decision was not in keeping with the honour of the Crown.[15] The court vacated the project approval and directed the Alberta Energy Regulator to reconsider whether the project is in the public’s best interest after considering FMFN's Treaty 8 rights.[14]